Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan - Cap-Net Evaluation and Learning Plan Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan for Capacity Building in Sustainable Water Management Cap-Net

Monitoring, Evaluationand Learning PlanMonitoring, Evaluationand Learning Planfor Capacity Building in Sustainable Water Management

Cap-Net International Network

November 2009

The purpose of this document is to improve learning from the Cap-Net programme, ensure adequate monitoring of the project and assist our partner networks monitor their own activities.

This monitoring, evaluation and learning plan (MELP) has been developed as a guide to monitoring and evaluation within the Cap-Net project and the tools listed are applied by the project management team and network partners.

The tools will be adjusted to meet the needs of partner networks and used as a basis for addressing monitoring needs at network level.

It is expected that the tools and strategy presented in this document are beneficial not only to Cap-Net and network partners but will be of use to a wider audience involved in network development and capacity building.

MONITORING, EVALUATION AND LEARNING PLAN

1

PA

RT

1

Table of Contents

PART 1: CAP-NET MONITORING AND LEARNING PLAN........................................... 1

1. INTRODUCTION............................................................................................... 1

2. CAP-NET WORKING ENVIRONMENT................................................................ 2 2.1. Local Ownership..............................................................................................2 2.2. Working in Networks .......................................................................................2 2.3. Demand Response...........................................................................................2

3. MONITORING AND LEARNING ENVIRONMENT............................................... 3 3.1. Monitoring Frameworks....................................................................................4 3.2. Outcome Mapping ...........................................................................................4

4. MONITORING, EVALUATION AND LEARNING PLAN (MELP) ........................... 6 4.1. Monitoring of Outputs ......................................................................................6 4.2. Evaluation of Outcomes ...................................................................................7

PART 2: MONITORING TOOLS.................................................................................. 9 Tool 1: Network Progress Reports / Activity Reports .......................................................9 Tool 2: Sample Course Evaluation Form....................................................................... 16 Tool 3: Monitoring Forms For Network Outputs ............................................................ 18 Tool 4: Measuring LFA Outcomes ................................................................................ 24 Tool 5: Assessment Of Network Management............................................................... 26


2


1

PA

RT

1

PART 1: CAP-NET MONITORING AND LEARNING PLAN

1. INTRODUCTION Cap-Net was established to address the significant capacity requirements emerging from the widespread adoption of integrated water resources management (IWRM) as a strategy to more sustainable management of water resources. At the time of its institution, Cap-Net, was seen as a complementary programme to the Global Water Partnership (GWP) activities on advocacy and IWRM planning. Like the GWP, Cap-Net works through autonomous regional and country networks of capacity building institutions. This approach makes it difficult to assign responsibility for outcomes and subsequently ensuring an effective monitoring system. Recognising that there are many factors that affect performance of individuals and institutions, it is particularly challenging to monitor and evaluate the results of capacity development initiatives. Cap-Net works with more than 20 capacity building networks varying in size, scope, membership, organisation and resource base. The only common factor is the commitment to capacity development in water use and management. Table 1: Cap-Net Objectives and Outcomes

DEVELOPMENT OBJECTIVE

Sustainable management and development of water resources and improved access to basic water supply and sanitation services are benefiting the poor and contributing to improvement of livelihoods, environmental sustainability and reduced vulnerability to climate change

IMMEDIATE OBJECTIVES OUTCOMES To build capacity of institutions and individuals to manage, develop and use water resources sustainably, and to adapt to increasing climate variability within a context that addresses gender equity and sustainable livelihoods;

Competence is in place resulting in improved management of water resources and delivery of water and sanitation services and accelerating implementation of IWRM.

Knowledge on climate change adaptation and the relevance of water resources management is widely available and training materials taken up by many local capacity building programmes.

To improve water management practices by:

using effective networks of capacity builders to impact on the ground, and

developing partnerships with international agencies to improve their outreach and collaboration on capacity building

Capacity building networks use multidisciplinary skills of competent members to scale up capacity building and actively support implementation programmes.

International partners collaborate with Cap-Net as a means to effectively transfer their knowledge and programmes for widespread implementation on the ground.

To develop and implement knowledge management systems that ensure access to the best of international and local knowledge, measure the effectiveness of capacity building services, and establish indicators and monitoring systems.

Knowledge management systems ensure access to the best of international and local knowledge and measure the effectiveness of capacity building services through indicators and monitoring systems.

Training and education programmes of capacity building institutions are adapted based on available and developed materials and measurement of their effectiveness through monitoring and evaluation.


2

2. CAP-NET WORKING ENVIRONMENT Cap-Net works with capacity building networks around the world loosely connected in the Cap-Net Global Network. The Cap-Net secretariat’s main work is to support the development and implementation of capacity building activities arising through the networks from the ground. In addition, Cap-Net identifies key evolving areas where increased attention is required and stimulates action in these areas by the networks. Three basic principles guide the Cap-Net programme:

2.1. Local Ownership

Local ownership of the capacity building process is essential for relevance and sustainability. Capacity development is an ongoing process that has to be anchored in local institutions and knowledgeable individuals. Cap-Net supports local experts to further develop their knowledge and to increase their exposure and activities in capacity development.

2.2. Working in Networks

The second principle is that working in networks is an effective strategy to draw together the various experts necessary to address the multidisciplinary approach of IWRM. At the same time this assists in creating a critical mass of experts for sustained support to the water sector reform process. Cap-Net is well aware that working with networks, which are usually informal structures, brings its own risks and uncertainties. Potential benefits, however are many including the opportunity to scale up action and share experience rapidly across countries and regions. Working in networks fosters local ownership and raises the credibility of members with their peers.

2.3. Demand Response

Cap-net emphasises the need for capacity building activities to respond to demand to ensure both relevance and impact. Cap-Net is well aware of the risk of international programmes being distant from real needs on the ground and also not being able to have any significant footprint where the problems are really being felt. The strategic approach already described allows Cap-Net to tackle these risks. In addition, mechanisms to emphasise capacity building actions which respond to demand from the ground further helps to increase relevance and impact. Network managers and the secretariat meet annually to develop strategies and share work plans. The Cap-Net secretariat work plan evolves from these meetings. All plans are approved by the Management Board which has representation from the networks. International partners help to set the Cap-Net agenda by highlighting areas for attention and/or by collaborating on issues of their programmatic interests and overlaps with Cap-Net.


3

PA

RT

1

3. MONITORING AND LEARNING ENVIRONMENT In its first phase of implementation during 2002 - 2006, Cap-Net favoured a seed funding strategy. This enabled building of local ownership of the actions ensuring locally relevant activities as demonstrated by local resource mobilisation. In phase two we have continued with the strategy of disbursing funds in this manner having the effect of local resource capture and building local ownership. The partner capacity building networks are autonomous and have differences in structure, membership and focus. Cap-Net is therefore dealing with a very disparate group of partners where traditional monitoring and evaluation systems have some drawbacks. Three programmatic objectives constitute the building blocks of Cap-Net’s programme (Figure 1). In phase one there was greater emphasises on development of networks with limited resources for supporting delivery of capacity development services. In the second phase Cap-Net is giving increased significance and support to the development of capacity. The figure presents the Cap-Net programme as linked building blocks to the goal of improved water resources management and this is followed by an overview of the planned project results (Fig. 2). Figure 1: Representation of the Cap-Net project to develop capacity for IWRM.


4

Figure 2: Overview of project result areas

3.1. Monitoring Frameworks

The Global Water Partnership found that using the Logical Framework Approach (LFA) methodology was not the best tool for monitoring and evaluating its work due to the nature of the its partnership structures. Similarly a Sida (2005) study suggested that alternative approaches should be considered to the LFA since it tends to be an unwieldy instrument in some circumstances. Cap-Net is proposing to continue the traditional assessment of indicators using the LFA of the project document as the basis for the monitoring and evaluation strategy. We also combine this with the less structured learning opportunities used in outcome mapping.

3.2. Outcome Mapping

GWP recently undertook a process to review its monitoring framework. The GWP report1 has been used broadly in considering the Cap-Net Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan (MELP). Building on the strategies used by the GWP, Cap-Net recognises the following five principles of outcome mapping2 to be very relevant to our situation: 1 GWP (2007). Partnership for Africa’s Water Development (PAWD) Project Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan


5

PA

RT

1

1. The development process is complex, open and dynamic: It is very difficult to assess impact, and assessing long-term impact does not necessarily provide the kind of information a programme requires to improve its performance.

2. Most development activities involve multiple factors and actors: Therefore, monitoring and evaluation of results should focus on contribution and not attribution.

3. Development is characterised by non-linear causality: However well thought out were the original objectives and the plans to achieve them, in a development environment you cannot control all variables; specific results are substantially unpredictable.

4. Development is about social actors relating to each other and their environment. Outcome mapping emphasizes the central role people and organisations play in the process of development.

5. The focus of monitoring and evaluation shifts away from assessing development changes in states or conditions of well-being, towards looking at changes in the behaviour, relationships, actions and activities of the people, groups and organizations with whom a development program works directly.

2 & 3 Global Water Partnership (2007), Partnership for Africa’s Water Development (PAWD) Project; Monitoring Evaluation and Learning Plan (p5)


6

4. MONITORING, EVALUATION AND LEARNING PLAN (MELP)

Cap-Net’s Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan (MELP) is taking the feasible, practical and necessary measures and methods into account to give a fair view of the value of the capacity building programme implemented by Cap-Net and the network partners. Monitoring and evaluation is best performed as an ongoing management and learning activity, supported by periodic external independent reviews. The MELP is being developed to assist the management of the Cap-Net project as well as an instrument to measure progress by the network partners. Table 2: Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Principles

PRINCIPLE DESCRIPTION/KEY QUESTION

Relevance Is the activity relevant, well conceived in the context of improved integrated water resources management? Can the strategy be improved?

Efficiency Is the activity implemented in a timely and cost-effective manner? Have resources been used cost effectively? Do the quantitative and qualitative results justify the resources expended?

Effectiveness In relation to the three project objectives, what changes in behaviour, relationships or activities of boundary partners is the project generating; what is the evidence? To what extent have the LFA Outputs been achieved and are contributing to these changes? What supports and barriers have affected the achievement of LFA Outputs and contribution towards LFA Outcomes? What are we learning from our experience and how can we improve?

Impact What evidence is there that the project is potentially contributing to improved Water Resources Management (WRM) and increased ability to support capacity development at the national and regional level through strengthened partnerships in each country?

Sustainability To what extent is the intervention contributing to building an enabling environment for continued capacity development action and for integrated water resources management—new sources of funding, changes in national laws, policies and regulations.

External Utility To what extent is the programme replicable? Might its approaches, methods, and/or content have potential value in other countries or regions or for other subjects?

4.1. Monitoring of Outputs

Outputs of the programme will be measured using monitoring procedures. Activities are tracked through contracts and reports and measured against outputs planned on an annual work planning and project cycle basis. The outputs are specified in the LFA and in the annual work plans. They are reported against in the regular progress reports. Specific reporting formats have been developed for reporting on short courses and other activities supported under the programme. These reports are submitted immediately after


7

PA

RT

1

events and are therefore output related. They include information from participant evaluations. Work implications:

Each contract has technical and financial reporting requirements with minimum reporting standards (Tool 1);

Work output summarised 6 monthly and reported against work plan and periodically against LFA.

Each course is evaluated by participants (Tool 2) Monitoring forms record basic information from each activity report. (Tool 3)

4.2. Evaluation of Outcomes

Outcomes are measured using a combination of approaches according to the output area of the project. It is important to get the balance right and not overload the networks or the Cap-Net secretariat with monitoring and evaluation responsibilities. One strategy is to use similar tools across the networks and to pool and share the results so that each network can use the aggregated data. The outcomes of capacity building activities are assessed using a structured, short questionnaire applied at a fixed interval of 6 to 12 months post training. The outcomes of network development are assessed through a combination of the following:

Work plans, activity reports showing the scale of action and interpreting the potential impact and value of the network;

Evidence based indicators to assess each network (Tool 5). Peer review of networks

The knowledge management outcomes refer largely to the availability and use of information and training materials. The follow up of case studies, training materials and other knowledge development activities provide a qualitative interpretation of the impact (Tool 3). Work implications:

Routine follow up of selected activities by each network; Network assessments can be conducted annually. Reviews/ evaluations will be assigned to consultants or network managers periodically.


8

Figure 4: Overview of Monitoring and Evaluation plan.


9

PA

RT

2

PART 2: MONITORING TOOLS

TOOL 1: NETWORK PROGRESS REPORTS / ACTIVITY REPORTS

When should this be applied?

After each activity such as a training course. Or as a collective half year report. Or as a report against a contract or to partners.

Who/ what is the target for the tool?

The tool should be completed by the network member responsible for executing an activity or by the network management.

How are the results to be used?

Assess the quality of work. Compile information on targets reached. Promote the activities of the network to members and others. Follow up with beneficiaries on the medium term impacts. Improve management, relevance and efficiency of future activities.

Forms: A: Technical and Financial Report on Network progress. B: Activity Technical and Financial Report.

A. Network Progress Report

Period covered Usually half year or year

Introduction Some general points introducing the report and identifying some key milestones that have been achieved.

Network management Changes, progress and status of the network membership. Changes in network staff,

hosting or situation. Communications, interactions with other networks or partners, website, brochures and

other promotion actions. Actions to support members such as training of trainers, visits, exchanges, participation

of members in meetings etc. Members meetings, steering committee meetings and major outcomes. Provide reference to supporting documents such as minutes of steering committee

meetings, ToT course reports etc.


10

Network activities Summary table comparing the work plan with the achieved activities with dates and location. Provide a brief summary of activities and outcomes for each training course, case study, workshop etc. Provide a reference to the actual full activity report. Give credit to the members involved in organizing and hosting activities. Discuss what problems have prevented the achievement of the plan and what successes have helped the plan implementation. What action is necessary or has been taken. Partners: identify the key partners that have worked with the network and indicate how successful and strong the partnership is.

Results Summarise the results in terms of the numbers of people trained, country, subject etc

in a table. Describe the main outcomes of the network activities in the period and the prospect for

further impact. Describe the opportunities that have emerged and will influence the programme in the

next period.

Financial report The budget managed by the secretariat should be presented in a separate table (Table 1). Report on the financial aspects of all network activities even if they were implemented by a member and not the secretariat. Summarise the financial information from each network activity.

Work plan for the coming period Provide a table of planned activities for the following year with an estimated budget. Support the table with short descriptions of each activity to justify why it is important, who will be targeted and the expected outcome.

Conclusion Close the report with a few personal comments on the progress of the network.


11

Table 1: Financial reporting: Core Network Support

Reporting period:

Network: Funding source

Expense line Amount per unit

No. of units

Date: from - to Total cost

Receipt/Invoice number 1 2 3

1. Human Resources

1.1 Salaries (gross amounts, local staff)

1.1.2 Administrative/ support staff

Training and workshop organisers

Name Per ?

Name Per ?

Part time network officer

Name Per ?

Subtotal Human Resources

3. Office equipment, vehicles and supplies

3.2 Computer equipment

description Per item

Subtotal office equipment, vehicles and supplies

4. Local office/Action costs

communication

Subtotal Local office/Action costs

5. Other costs, services

5.5 Translation, interpreters

Translation of what

5.8 Visibility actions Promotional materials


12

Reporting period:



No. of units



Subtotal Other costs, services

6. Other

6.3 Studies and reviews by networks

Case study title and date

Case study title and date

Subtotal Other

7. Total cost of the Action


13

PA

RT

2

B. Activity Narrative Report

Background Draw the context in which the activity has been conducted. How it addresses sustainable water management issues in your region. Contextual information on the network and implementing institutions may be necessary.

Activity Describe the activity or activities, what it aimed to achieve. In case of workshop, give programme summary. In case of study, give summary of terms of reference. Who implemented it, where and when and with what partners.

Results Describe the outcome of the activity. In case of workshop or training course, describe the strong and weak points of the programme and facilitation, and give summary of participants’ evaluation. In case of study, describe how it has been conducted, and give summary of the conclusions and recommendations. Give a broad overview of financial income and expenditure and issues arising with reference to the financial report.

Conclusion Did the activity meet the expectation and the objectives as described? Are there any opportunities arising or follow actions planned. What lessons are to be learned.

Annex Programme/ terms of reference List of participants

Name Gender Country Position / organisation

Contact address

email

Financial report Table 2, report on income and expenditures supported by invoices and receipts. Report against activity budget by budget line as presented in the proposal of the activity, See below


14

Table 2: Financial reporting Training Courses

Reporting on:

Reporting period:



No. of units



1. Human Resources

1.1 Salaries (gross amounts, local staff)

1.1.1 Technical - LECTURERS AND FACILITATORS

Name Per ?

Name Per ?

1.1.2 Administrative/ support staff - TRAINING AND WORKSHOP ORGANISERS

Name Per ?

Name Per ?

1.3 Per diems for missions/travel

1.3.3 Seminar/conference participants *)

Name, country Per diem





Subtotal Human Resources

2. Travel

2.1. International travel *)

Name, from place? - to place? Per flight



Name, from place? - to place? Other costs


15

Reporting on:

Reporting period:



No. of units



Name, from place? - to place? Other costs

Subtotal Travel

5. Other costs, services

5.5 Translation, interpreters

Translation of what

5.8 Visibility actions

Promotional materials

Subtotal Other costs, services

6. Other

6.1 Organisational costs of trainings and workshops *):

Title and date

Subtotal Other

7. Total cost of the Action


16

Tool 2: SAMPLE COURSE EVALUATION FORM


At the end of each training course.


All participants.


Assess the quality of work. Improve organisation of courses. Improve selection of facilitators, and participants. Improve management, relevance, efficiency and impact of future activities.

Course title: Date:

We invite you to complete this course-evaluation form to help us improve our training activities. Please be frank and open with your ratings and comments. Your opinion – whether positive or negative - is valuable to us and will be considered in the preparation of future activities. 1. Relevance of the course to your current work or function.

None Low Medium High Very high

2. Extent to which you have acquired information / content that is new to you.


3. Relevance of the information / content that you have acquired for your work.


4. Did the course reach your expectations and objectives?

No Little Just enough More than enough

Completely


17

PA

RT

2

5. The presentation of the different sessions was:

Excellent

Very good

Good

Average

Poor

6. Participation possibilities during the course were:

Excellent

Very good

Good

Average

Poor

7. Supporting materials for the different sessions were:

Excellent

Very good

Good

Average

Poor

8. What action will you take now to implement the knowledge gained from this course?

9. Please comment or make suggestions on the following:

Course content

Facilitation

Support materials

Course organisation

Thank you for taking the time to fill out this survey. Your inputs will be considered to improve the quality and relevance of future activities and they are highly appreciated.


18

TOOL 3: MONITORING FORMS FOR NETWORK OUTPUTS


As an ongoing collation of outputs achieved. As a minimum compiled every six months.


Cap-Net secretariat.


Compile basic information on the activities of the network against indicators and targets. Used to review and revise work plans and priorities. Used as a basis for follow up of medium term impacts. Used for promotion of the network and increased visibility. Improve management, relevance and efficiency of future activities.

Forms: A. Training and education courses B. Case studies C. Training materials D. Meetings/workshops


19

PA

RT

2

A. Training and education courses

Title Date Countries covered

Participant number and gender

Action

(report checked & filed)

Follow – up*

Network and partners

*Training Course follow – up.

All participants (not facilitators) should be followed up between 6 – 12 months after

course completion to assess the outcomes and impacts of the training. Mails should be addressed individually and mention the specific training event, title and

date and location. Where English was not the language of instruction then the questionnaire will need to

be translated and may be delivered by the network concerned. Dear You participated in the course “…………………..” held from “……………..” at “……………”. Will you please take a few moments to answer these 3 questions. This will help us to improve our work. (just type your answers after each question and then send the mail back)

1. How have you used the knowledge from the course to improve your own

performance at work?

2. How have you shared the knowledge from the course to improve the performance of

your organisation?

3. How have you spread the knowledge from the course to other people and

institutions?

Thank you for your assistance,


20

B. Case studies


Action

(Filed, news, circulation, web up load)

Follow – up* Network and partners

* Follow – up: 6-12 months later follow up to confirm how the case studies have been disseminated, used to influence capacity building activities of Cap-Net or networks or resulted in other outcomes.

Case Study Follow-up Response Sheet for Network Manager

Topic:

Network’s Name:

Respondent’s name and designation:

Interviewer’s name and contact details:

Mode of Communication: Tel Skype Email

Questions: 1. How have you used the case study developed by your network?

2. How have you disseminated the case study?

3. Have you seen any impact arising from the use of case study?

Yes No

Provide details


21

PA

RT

2

4. Have you received any feed back from the users of case study regarding its usefulness and accessibility?

Yes No

Provide details

5. Do you want to add anything?


22

C. Training materials

Title Date Product

(manual, CD, web, ppt)

Action

(distribution, courses, web upload, news)

Follow – up* Network and partners

* Follow – up: As a minimum make an assessment after 12 months of the numbers of materials disseminated, requested and the global distribution. Also assess the number of training activities related to the materials. Cross check with training course follow-up on the outcomes from training using the materials. Ask the views of facilitators on the usefulness of the materials in the course. Ask partners if they are happy with the materials developed in the partnership.


23

PA

RT

2

D. Meetings/workshops


Participant number and gender

Output

(Plan, strategy)

Follow – up*

Network and partners

* Follow – up: After 12 months follow up the extent to which plans and strategies have been implemented.

Meeting/ Workshop Follow-up Response Sheet for Network Manager

Title:

Date of Meeting / Workshop:

Network’s Name:

Respondent’s name and designation:

Interviewer’s name and contact details:

Mode of Communication: Tel Skype Email

Questions: 1. Was any follow-up action taken regarding the decisions made/ plan developed during

the meeting/ workshop? Provide details.

2. Do you see any impact arising from the meeting/ or workshop? Provide details.

3. Do you want to add anything?


24

TOOL 4: MEASURING LFA OUTCOMES


This is a higher level analysis of the success of the programme and can be compiled from other levels of monitoring and evaluation. It provides a framework for the Cap-Net management team to periodically review the results and progress of the project. Suggested done by internal and external reviewers.


Cap-Net staff. Network coordinators. For external review the opinion of key partners can be assessed. Are donors / funding partners / management board targets of this tool as well?


Compile basic information on the activities of the network against indicators and targets. Used to review and revise work plans and priorities. Used as a basis for follow up of medium term impacts. Used for promotion of the network and increased visibility. Improve management, relevance and efficiency of future activities.

What changes in the behaviour, relationships or activities of national governments or ministries of water or national multi-stakeholder groups have been observed during the reporting period relevant to the project LFA outcomes? Specify what changed, when and where and how it affected the LFA Outcome. Outcome 1 Competence is in place resulting in improved management of water resources and delivery of water and sanitation services benefiting rural communities and the poor and speeding implementation of IWRM.

Specifically, who has taken action? What have they done to move the country towards WRM and service provision? How has the mode of WRM and service delivery already changed? How can you tell? (use indicators)

Outcome 2 Networks are the regional/country focal point for capacity building on water resources management and water supply and sanitation using multi-disciplinary skills of competent members to scale up capacity building and actively support implementation programmes.

What partners are involved in the development of the network and how? What are they contributing to the process / how do they show their commitment /

ownership? What is the result? How can you tell? (use indicators)


25

PA

RT

2

Outcome 3 Knowledge management systems ensure access to the best of international and local knowledge and measure the effectiveness of capacity building services through indicators and monitoring systems.

Specifically, who has taken action? What have they done to improve access to international and local knowledge? How has access already changed? How can you tell? (use indicators)


26

Tool 5: ASSESSMENT OF NETWORK MANAGEMENT

Evidence based indicators; Foundation for an effective capacity building network.


Annually where possible.


Network management –Can be conducted in a facilitated interview or by external reviewers with verification of findings through reports, website, members.


- Identify strong and weak areas of the network.

- Assist focussing work plans, strengthening network management and involvement of network members. Improving impact.

- Assist external agencies to target support to network development.

Use of the tool The tool is intended to assist management identify the effectiveness of their network and to identify areas where they may wish to target attention. It also assists external agencies (e.g. Cap-Net) to identify specific areas of network management for targeted support. Application

The tool is best applied by an external person or the steering committee. The facilitator assesses the indicators, on the basis of evidence. Findings from e.g. an

interview with the network manager should be cross checked from one of the other sources:

- the network manager/coordinator

- the website;

- Network records;

- A sample of network members; or

- Clients and partners. Network management should be kept informed of the process and also be provided

with an opportunity to respond to the draft report with additional evidence that may have been overlooked.


27

PA

RT

2

The tool Score each indicator as follows:

Symbol Category Explanation

☺ Good Indicates that the item has been properly addressed and the team is satisfied with what is being done.

Improving Effort has been applied to the item but the situation is not yet as desired.

Needs attention Indicates this item has not been given enough attention and corrective actions need to be implemented.

Network Function Indicator, Result and Evidence

Network Management

1 An operational guideline is available and is being followed

Result: ☺

Evidence

In 1 paragraph: What is the evidence; who provided it and how was it confirmed.

2 A current work plan is available and shared

Result: ☺

Evidence


Network has transparent operating procedures

3 A current annual report is available

Result: ☺

Evidence


4 Activities are implemented by members (proportion of activities undertaken by members in current annual report)

Result: ☺

Evidence


5 Members fundraise for activities

Result: ☺

Evidence


There is local ownership of networks with members committed to plan and lead network activities

6 Members have access to network training materials and or reports

Result: ☺

Evidence


Network has a strategy that addresses network development and

7 Strategy is available and addresses financing

Result: ☺


28

Network Function Indicator, Result and Evidence financing Evidence


Network Competence

8 Network has been evaluated .(Report of last internal and/or external evaluation is available )

Result: ☺

Evidence


9 Activity monitoring and/or follow up reports available ( proportion of activities evaluated at completion and proportion of courses followed up)

Result: ☺

Evidence


Network monitors its own performance and is open to review and evaluation.

10 Planning and implementation of activities draws from lessons learnt during evaluation

Result: ☺

Evidence


11 Membership list available and up to date with member expertise

Result: ☺

Evidence


12 Website up to date

Result: ☺

Evidence


13 Up to date promotional material available

Result: ☺

Evidence


Up to date knowledge map with existing and new knowledge.

14 Data base of client agencies available

Result: ☺

Evidence


Delivery of Capacity

The network is contributing directly to capacity development on the ground.

15 Members aware of capacity needs and opportunities (Report of last needs assessment or opportunity assessment is available)

Result: ☺

Evidence



29

PA

RT

2

Network Function Indicator, Result and Evidence

16 People trained/educated (Number of training activities and participants reached- male and female)

Result: ☺

Evidence


17 Network competence in capacity building recognised by other stakeholders (lists of partners, capacity building contracts awarded)

Result: ☺

Evidence


* If considered necessary anecdotes can be attached to demonstrate evidence of the fulfilment of a network function. The attachments should show to which indicator they refer.

International Network for Capacity Building inIntegrated Water Resources Management

Marumati Building, 491 - 18th Avenue,Rietfontein, 0084P.O. Box X03, Gezina,Pretoria 0031,South AfricaEmail: [email protected]: www.cap-net.org

Documents

Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan - Cap-Net Evaluation and Learning Plan Monitoring, Evaluation and Learning Plan for Capacity Building in Sustainable Water Management Cap-Net